Thursday, December 29, 2011

We all grew up learning that rhyme... We know the rest. "But words will never hurt me...." Well, most of us did, anyway. The basic idea is that insults are not as harmful as actual, physical attacks. Unless, of course, you live in the fantasy world of the transgender crazies. There, you start talking about "violence of spirit." Or, at least you do if you are "Autumn" Sandeen and you are trying to elevate yourself as the transgender Martin Luther King, Jr. again. Yes, Mr. Sandeen is at it again.

In another example of his attempts to look saintly, he has taken on the issue of the transgender fellow who, to quote "Monica" Roberts, "opened a can of whoop ass." Yes, the same Mr. Sandeen who just about a month and a "two-thirds full cup of an iced, decaffeinatedhammerhead." Do you ever get the feeling that Mr. Sandeen is a bit obsessed about coffee? I mean, really, do we need that much detail? Including, I might add, the link to the definition of a "hammerhead?" And let me digress her, and ask why anyone would want a decaffeinated version of such a drink?

Here is how Sandeen describes his assault:

I have no idea whether this young man “read” me as trans, or recognized me from my being publicly visible as trans in the local media; and it didn’t really matter which of the two it was. What mattered to me is the very fact that he used an anti-transgender pejorative toward me that’s on par with the anti-gay f-word pejorative.
At the moment I heard and felt the sting of those words, I flashed red. I took the lid off my iced coffee and threw it in his face. While doing that, I said, “That’s for calling me thing.” Then I walked past – having noticed the young man had a stunned look on his face as I turned my back on him. I guess he expected me to lower my head in shame, obviously not knowing that I identify myself as being “Trans and Proud.”I felt good about my behavior until I realized I’d given into aggression and retaliation. I did the man no real harm, and I didn’t engage in behavior that the young man didn’t on some level deserve … but that’s not the way I want to behave when confronted with hate.

…In each of those two situations, I saw that I’m not always the moral person I see myself as being, but instead am someone who, in flashes of anger, doesn’t live up to her own standards of tolerance, patience, love and understanding.For me, I need to stop weaponizing my coffee and start thinking before I act in anger. Darkness can’t drive out darkness – only light can do that. I want to be a light.

First off, given the details he provided, I have to wonder if Sandeen's real regret is that he lost his precious coffee. Second, it apparently never occurs to Sandeen that he should be glad that the "young man" didn't open his own can of whoop ass. Clearly, Sandeen acted like a male, and escalated the situation, because, after all, he is "Trans and Proud....and apparently not very bright." In the original version of this, he included one other detail...there were three young men standing there. Now, a woman would be more cognizant of her safety. A man, and Sandeen is all man, wouldn't think about that. He is lucky he didn't become a martyr for this years "Day of Remembrance."

Well, Mr. Sandeen has apparently seen the light! He goes on to say:

Thinking through how I’ll respond when I’m intentionally misgendered or called a pejorative in the future — as I’m absolutely sure I’ll be intentionally misgendered or called a pejorative in the future — I’ve decided that I’ll turn to person who engages in violence of the spirit and say “May God bless you, and may your days be filled with peace.”

Setting aside, for the moment, the fact that misgendering Sandeen would be to refer to him using female pronouns, I suppose this is an improvement over his previous actions, which included cyber-stalking me. Funny how he has not owned up to that one. I guess that wasn't bad enough to tarnish his "halo."

If you read the original article by Sandeen, entitled "I’ve got coffee; and I’m not afraid to use it," you will find that it reads less like a mea culpa, and more like a boast. If nothing else, the title shows he really doesn't get it...

The simple bottom line is, no insult justifies violence, even if you are silly enough to call the insult "violence of spirit." As I have said many times, I don't take responsibility for other people's bigotry. Shoot, I am tired of men like Sandeen trying to co-opt the experience of true transsexuals. I don't care to be referred to as transgender, and find it highly insulting....but I am not going to go out and "open a can of whoop ass" because someone calls me that. And I have been actually misgendered, and almost every time it has been deliberate and malicious, it has been by a member of the "transgender" community. The one exception? A guy I had met, and broke up with. When I told him I didn't want to see him again, he tossed that at me. And? And, I just walked away laughing.

Yes, there is one other point that needs to be made. I am secure in my identity. I am a woman, and like any woman who gets called a man, my response is to consider the source, and realize that the person is not worth bothering with.

Tuesday, December 27, 2011

The Huffington Post is all a twitter over a story out of New York about a "transwoman" beating up a man who call him a woman. In another words, the dude goes ballistic and acts like a man because, well, some guy called him a man while he was decked out in his feminine finery. Okay....

This is a perfect example of the bizarre transgender mindset that imagines that they are perfect examples of the finest examples of female behavior, while in reality they act just as they did as men. It reminds me of the story I read once about some contractor in Texas who announced to his employees that he would be "transitioning" to become a woman. The next day, he came in dressed as a woman, sat down at his desk, plopped his size 14 pumps up on the desk as he always did, and pulled out his usual cigar.

Of course, this criminal act has found considerable favor in the transgender community. None other than "Monica" Roberts, of TransGriot is thrilled over this act of male bravado. Yes, he of the massive "neoclit," his term for his penis, had this to say:

It's not a good idea to get someone pissed off at you who not only has a little more strength than the average cis female, but is an estrogen based lifeform to boot.

Roberts forgets to mention that this person also has the mind of a man. The reference to estrogen shows Roberts' cluelessness. In a true transsexual, estrogen has a calming effect. In a man, it causes other effects, which may lead to problems like depression.

You see a male brain is wired for testosterone. A female brain is wired for estrogen. In a true transsexual, the brain reacts well to the estrogen. In a male brain, the estrogen mostly causes depression. It does not have as much of calming effect, though it is probably not going to cause aggression. I am not sure what Roberts is trying to claim, but in any case, he is, as usual, blowing smoke.

And, it should be kept in mind that many transgender people adjust their hormone intake to avoid losing the ability to have an erection. "Functional" transgender prostitutes are in high demand among men with a desire to be penetrated by a "woman." Yes, it is all rather bizarre, and does not completely make sense. But there are men who seek out men who crossdress who are willing to engage in active anal sex. And a man willing to perform such a sex act would probably also be inclined to react violently to an insult.

Sadly, the LGBT community seems to be embracing this criminal act. This will probably result in more such incidents. We already had "Autumn" Sandeen bragging about throwing coffee at at someone who called him a man. Well, it was supposed to be an apology because Sandeen was not acting like Martin Luther King, Jr. but it was really more about bragging. And now this. One has to wonder, again, do these people think they are above the law?

Monday, December 26, 2011

"Christan" Williams is at it again. This time he seems to have cobbled together a post he claims is from a "separatist." In the past, Williams has claimed to have discovered heretofore unknown articles "proving" that the term "transgender" was was used long before anyone knew, and was even favored by Christine Jorgensen. I have already noted that the sources cited are all extremely obscure, and difficult, if not impossible to locate. Now, without providing a citation, Williams provides a supposed essay by a separatist (i.e. someone like myself, who does not identify as transgender, in defiance of Williams' demands). Odd, but I searched Google for the first line from this supposed posting, but the only thing that showed up was Williams' article. Curious....

Granted, Williams does not claim that what he refers to as a "sad little rant" is from a blog site, or a web posting. But the fact that no citation is given seems, at best, curious.

Williams posts the usual "gender fascist" silliness about "elitism," "shame," and "transphobia." One of the more interesting bits of illogic is when Williams tries to link the case of Peter Oiler, a transvestite who was fired by Winn Dixie, and who repeatedly lost in court, to transsexuals. Rather odd logic for someone who claims to be a post-op. Of course, as we have seen with cases like "Autumn" Sandeen, some transgender definitions of "post-op" are simply lies. I don't know if Williams actually had SRS, but I increasingly doubt it.

Then Williams tries to inject racism into the discussion (well, he is a big fan of "Monica" Roberts) who hates post-op transsexuals and white people with equal passion) when he refers to "separatists" as "our down-low community."Williams shows where he is really coming from when he states this:

When it comes down to it, here’s the basic, broad-brush world view differences between Separatists and Inclusionists…The Inclusionist World View:

We ALL face oppression because our history or our expression violates cultural gender stereotypes.

Our oppressors LOVE our differences and NEVER want our differences to be seen as normal differences (on par with differences which violate cultural norms, eg Look Who’s Coming For Dinner)

Our oppressors use our differences to “otherize” us so that oppression becomes a social meme.

Our oppressors oppress us because they like the power, not because they don’t like our differences.

The Separatist World View:

Transsexuals face oppression because people confuse us with crossdressers and drag queens.

Our oppressors HATE what they view as being strange and/or deviant behavior.

Transsexualism isn’t about strange and/or deviant behavior; it’s a medical condition and has nothing to do with breaking gender stereotypes in our culture.

Our oppressors will stop oppressing us if we can get them to see that we aren’t like crossdressers and that we are instead like intersex people.

Since Williams takes it upon himself to define people's views, why not return the favor. Here is his real view:

I get a kick out of facing oppression. I really don't want to be anything other than "weird." I hate the idea of remotely being a part of "normal" society, but I want to force everyone to pretend I am normal. Knowing I am really upsetting people is a large part of the fun in this little game I play.

I love engaging in strange and/or deviant behavior, and I really, really love forcing it down people's throats, knowing they really hate it.

How dare transsexuals refuse to accept the labels I put on myself, and on them. They will be strange and deviant because, well because I say they are. They have no right to disagree with me.

I'm going to shove my behavior down everyone's throat. This is all about power, and I want it all. Anyone who disagrees with me will be insulted, belittled, and attacked until they submit.

Yes, kind of redundant, but that is how Williams seems to be. He is a one note opera, and it is all about how he is right, and everyone is wrong.

The real irony in all of this is Williams' claim that he is not demanding that people identify as he wishes. He even goes so far as to say:

If the down-low guy doesn’t want to identify as being gay, then fine. If the stealth lesbian doesn’t want to identify as being a lesbian, then fine. If the TS Separatist doesn’t want to identify as being trans, then fine. HOWEVER, do not demand that the entire trans community rework its culture to suit your whims and unsubstantiated statements of fact.

Those are strange words coming from someone who spends an entire post attacking people who don't identify as transgender. His bottom line, "I have a right to my views, and I demand that you respect my identity, but I am not going to respect yours. You can call yourself whatever you want, but I will call you whatever I want, but I will absolutely go ballistic if you call me anything other than what I demand."

Oh well, I would call Williams a bad joke. As to what he calls me, well, who cares? I just consider the source. And I have a good laugh.

Wednesday, December 21, 2011

Well, it appears that "Autumn" Sandeen, has his panties in a wad over what is, essentially, a transvestite fantasy. In his latest post at Pam's House Blend, he is in hysterics over a new ABC TV show called "Work It." The show is about two men who pretend to be women so they can get jobs as pharmaceutical representatives for a company that is apparently in total violation of Federal law. I wonder how they will explain the company getting away with a policy of hiring "only women?" But I digress....

The show, which seems to basically be a rehash of the old plot concept from Bosom Buddiesand Tootsie. The idea is, a straight male is "forced" by some circumstance beyond his control to dress up as a woman. He may be doing this to get a job, or to obtain some other benefit. And even though it goes against his very nature, he succeeds, and perhaps, comes to be a better man because of it. Oh, and he finds that he enjoys being a woman, if only for a while. In another words, it is a classic transvestite fantasy of forced feminization.

So, why is Mr. Sandeen so upset? Well, it appears that LGBT activists have declare war on this show because it "trivializes" the experiences of transgender people, and well, it makes fun of the idea of men wearing dresses. In another words, this is a safe issue for them to use to "prove" that they are really, really aware of, and concerned about, transgender issues and they are doing something about it,

Of course, the whole thing is just ridiculous. This is a show about two straight men disguising themselves as women to get jobs. They are "pretending" to be women in order to get a job they would otherwise be denied (again, how is this company getting away with a clear violation of Federal law?). That is totally unrelated to "real" transgender people who ae pretending to be women because they think it is a fun and cool thing to be a "woman with a penis." And, it is unrelated to true transsexuals who are women, who are in the process of putting they lives on track.

The claim is made that in "real life" transgender people face problems:

In the brick-and-mortar world, most of us late-transitioning trans women didn’t have the benefit of make-up and wardrobe departments to facilitate our transitions. Many of us started our transitions with deep voices, heavy beards, and bone structures that didn’t say “woman.” Many of us were — many of us are — visibly trans, not “passing” in our target sex of female.

Of course, Mr. Sandeen fails to mention that he, and other transgender people generally attack anyone attempting to be actually "pass." The whole idea for people like him is to be visibly transgender. They are not interested in actually being female, but derive their identity from being "women with penises." So, a show about two straight men who somehow manage to overcome obvious problems and succeed in passing, is just too much for them. They think, how dare these men actually work as women, and not "trans women." It appears that they are upset with this show for much the same reason that they hate those who identify as transsexuals, but not transgender. They hate anyone who is successful at being a woman.

Sandeen attempts to feign ignorance of the whole concept of stealth:

In the brick-and-mortar world, the two crossdressers in Work Itwould be having uncomfortable discussions with the HR department of their new employer about transitioning in the workplace, including negotiating restroom use. They would likely at least face workplace harassment, and if they lived in the 35 states without employment protections based on gender identity, they might not have been hired — or if already hired might have been fired — specifically for being trans…and without much legal recourse.

I live in the brick and mortar world, as he puts it. I have never had an uncomfortable discussion with the HR department. In all of my jobs, except one, I was not remotely out. I did work at a position as an outreach worker for a research project that targeted people who identified as transgender or transsexual. I had participated in the project at the request of my therapist at the time, and I sought the position because it provided me with both an income and health insurance benefit that would cover my sex reassignment survey. I later moved on to another position that was not directly related to transgender issues. But even there, there were no such discussion.

No, most jobs I have had since transition have been held simply as a woman. I never seriously considered "transitioning" on the job. Even in the outreach position, I had been in transition for years, and was simply listed as a female. In fact, I ignored requests sent out to all employees in the organization to, "be out." Every year, during Pride Month, they would distribute posters featuring employees who were willing to publicly identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender. I had no desire to do so.

I lived in one of those 35 states. In my first job after transition, I was hired as as a woman, and assigned to the lingerie department. In my job, among other duties, I had to assist other women in the dressing room. No one ever questioned whether whether I was a woman. Granted, unlike those Sandeen describes, I had undergone electrolysis, had been on hormones for years, and well, I admit I am blessed with relatively good bone structure. But, more importantly, I did not begin transition until i was ready. This was not a silly fantasy for me. It was about being who, and what, I really was. Not engaging in dress-up and forcing people to indulge my delusions. I was not interested in being transgender, or even transsexual. I was simply living as the woman I already was.

The only connection this show has to transgender is the fact that it is essentially a clean version of transvestite fiction. You would think that someone like Sandeen would be excited to have this presented weekly. But, the LGBT activists have spoken, and so he must rush to front of the mob, and help lead the charge. After all, if they get this show cancelled, they will have shown their power and TV executives will be under their control.

Personally, I think the show is a rather silly idea. The answer to sex discrimination is to take the employer to court, not to pretend to be the sex they are willing to hire. But that would not make a very good TV show. Another objection to this show is that it uses the idea of men dressed as women for humor. Funny, but I would think they would start by making an effort to shut down every drag show, and to force every drag queen, to stop performing. Of course, men dressed as women is humorous. And yes, that is a problem for transgender people. After all, that is exactly what they essentially identify as.

GLAAD has the following to say about the show:

GLAAD has seen the pilot and while the show’s pilot does not explicitly address transgender people, many home viewers unfamiliar with the realities of being transgender will still make the connection. Work It invites the audience to laugh at images of men trying to adopt a feminine appearance, thereby also making it easier to mock people whose gender identity and expression are different than the one they were assigned at birth. Said GLAAD’s Acting President Mike Thompson, “Transphobia is still all too prevalent in our society and this show will only contribute to it. It will reinforce the mistaken belief that transgender women are simply ‘men pretending to be women,’ and that their efforts to live their lives authentically as women are a form of lying or deception.”

These problems are even more pronounced in the show’s printed ad, which depicts the two main characters dressed as women while standing at men’s room urinals. Not only does it inadvertently further notions that transgender identities are humorous or artificial, but imagery like this are one of the first things anti-LGBT activists resort to when trying to deny transgender people protections against discrimination. As Mark Snyder from the Transgender Law Center said in a recent article, a printed image like this in magazines or the sides of city buses will “make it more difficult for transgender people to gain full equality — including the important right to access public accommodations appropriate to their gender identity.”

GLAAD clearly has no grasp of transgender reality. When you have men, who are intent of being "trans women," i.e. retaining their identity as men, while attempting to force society to accept them as women, simply, and only, because they claim to be women, it is really kind of hard to argue that they are not engaged in a form of lying or deception. Granted, the deception is not the one that GLAAD is thinking of, but it is, at best, a shaky position. And the issue is not the right to access public accommodation appropriate to theyr "gender identity," but quite the opposite. It is about men, who are quite happy as men, getting into women's spaces.

As to the print ad, I grant, it is a bit absurd. Transgender people don't walk up to urinals like that. No, they stand to pee in the stalls of women's room. After all, as I said, forcing their way into women's rooms is a major part of their agenda, though I do suppose they would welcome forcing women's rooms to include urinals. But that is a whole new discussion.

Monday, November 21, 2011

It has long been obvious that Bil Browning is an LGBT extremist who has no respect for the opinions of anyone who does not share his radical view of how the world should operate, but he has really gone off the deep end... In a recent diatribe, he said the following:

Over on the "Sec of Labor Issues Statement for Transgender Day of Remembrance" post, Lisa McDonald decided to use the topic - a day set aside to honor transgender people murdered because of their gender expression - to reiterate her dislike for LGBT people:

What about the rights of anyone that is included in the Transgender umbrella living or murdered? You know those who don't wish to be labeled Transgender or that might take offense to gay politics? I suppose their rights don't matter as long as those who are happy being labeled Transgender and the LGBT gets from free press from their loss of life.I will be openly protesting the Transgender Day of Remembrance on their behalf and to point to the injustice of forced transgender inclusion. As for the Obama administration shame on them for bowing to queer politics and Mara Kiesling.

I'll be damned if I give any space to someone who apparently wants to wrap themselves in the Fred Phelps flag and piss on someone's grave. If that's the type of person you are, you don't belong here.

Good grief! The only one acting remotely like Fred Phelps is Bil Browning himself. He is showing the same sort of blind adherence to a point of view that Phelps does. He is right, and damn anyone who disagrees with him. Sad in a way, but not surprising. Extremists tend to be more alike than different, even if the target of their extremism is radically different. Simply put, the reason I consider Fred Phelps to be a nut case whose views are not really worth anything is why I feel the same about Bil Browning. Intolerance is intolerance, period.

This is shown by his next remark:

If you regularly write complaints about how much you hate being lumped in with the gays and lesbians and the "transgenders," feel free to haul your ass right out of here.* Seriously. If it bothers you that much that people refer to themselves as they wish, go somewhere other than our comments section where they're free to do so.

I don't know when I have ever seen anyone complain "that people refer to themselves as they wish," unless it was someone taking the officially approved "Bil Browning position" and insisting that transsexuals must obediently accept the label "transgender." The issue is not people calling themselves "transgender," but instead is people forcing that term on others. Sadly, Browning not only insists on forcing his views on others, he lies about other's views in a pathetic attempt to justify his outrageous attitude.

Bil Browning, like a lot of extremists, cannot abide dissent. The sad thing is that so many of his followers are more than willing for him to silence those who do not share a particular viewpoint. This approach is quite common among transgender blogs. More often than not, they hold comments pending moderation, so they insure that no view contrary to the party line slips through. Others will quickly ban anyone who provides a coherent argument against the transgender position.

As always, my blogs welcomes those who disagree. I only censor comments that invade people's privacy. Beyond that, I take on all comers.

Sunday, November 20, 2011

Well, here we are...another November 20th, and another round of posts on all the transgender blogs about how this is the "Transgender Day of Remembrance." Yes, it is time to celebrate all the honored dead, who sadly, in most cases, did something really stupid.

Now, don't get me wrong. I am not engaging in blaming the victim. No one deserves to die, but in most of the cases of those who are honored and even near worshipped each year the victim could have, and yes, should have, taken steps to avoid being murdered. It is just common sense.

And every year, the transgender extremists seem to go out of their way to discourage people from showing said common sense. After all, they believe it is their absolute right to act as they wish, and expect people to, well, suck it up. Unfortunately, no matter how much they believe in such a right, and no matter how much such a right might exist, reality says if you are not careful, you may end up dead.

If you are a pre-op, or you are a crossdressing male who belongs to the "They Will Take My Penis When They Pry My Cold Dead Fingers From It" club, and you become involved with a man who does not know your situation, and you let him "discover" your little secret without warning, then you run a significant rise of violence. It may be wrong, and hey, you may even live in a jurisdiction where the "trans panic" defense is not allowed, but what does that matter if you wind up seriously injured or dead? But hey, you will be honored on the next Nov. 20th.

I do wonder if some of those who die are not subconsciously looking for release. I do wonder if they are suicidal. I understand the temptation that one might feel to seek out companionship. But one has to be careful. Taking chances is stupid. Letting a man discover your penis without warning is very likely to end badly. He is probably not going to be delighted to discover you are a male, no matter how often you call it a "neo-clit." He is likely, at best, to reject you, and at worst, to engage in violence.

If you have to reveal, do it in a public place, but one where there is enough privacy that he is not going to be shamed. Remember, no matter how "out, loud, and proud," you are, he may not share you beliefs.

And also ask yourself, is it worth your life to engage in sex work? There are other options. It is NEVER your only option. It may seem an appealing choice, but is it worth your life? Most who engage in sex work wind up using drugs to dull the pain, and then they find that they have to do more sex work to afford the drugs, which leads to more pain, that requires more drugs....well, it just gets worse and worse. Is it really what you want?

If you are truly transsexual, it is a matter of transition or die. If you are transgender, if you want to hang on to your maleness while pretending to be a woman, you really need professional health, and you really need to consider if your little hobby is worth dying for.

But seriously, those who do die are not martyrs, and while they should be mourned, they don't deserve the near worship they receive. They should be seen as tragic examples of what not to do.

Friday, November 4, 2011

The latest round of transgender insanity comes from Colorado where a seven year-old male asked to join a Girl Scout troop, and was initially denied. Bobby Montoya appears to identify as a girl, and is allowed to dress as one by his mother.

Now, this issue hit home for me. When I was around 10, I too wanted to join the Girl Scouts. Of course, at the time, it was completely out of the question. I did borrow my friend's Girl Scout Handbooks, and pretty much devoured everything in it. I dreamed of being allowed to be a Girl Scout, and even had a membership card that I found in a friend's basement. His mother had been a troop leader, and she had dumped a bunch of stuff there.

Now, I think it is wonderful that the Girl Scouts are willing to be more open-minded these days, but I think there need to be some limits on this sort of thing as well. It is not clear from the articles that I have read whether Bobby actually identifies as a girl, or if he identifies as a boy who wants to be a girl. His mother refers to him with male pronouns, and he has a male name.

And, in fact, it appears there are some such limits. Here is the statement from the Girl Scouts of Colorado:

“Girl Scouts is an inclusive organization and we accept all girls in Kindergarten through 12th grade as members. If a child identifies as a girl and the child’s family presents her as a girl, Girl Scouts of Colorado welcomes her as a Girl Scout. Our requests for support of transgender kids have grown, and Girl Scouts of Colorado is working to best support these children, their families and the volunteers who serve them. In this case, an associate delivering our program was not aware of our approach. She contacted her supervisor, who immediately began working with the family to get the child involved and supported in Girl Scouts.”

The key point here is, "presents her as a girl." While I would disagree with the use of the term "transgender," this is a reasonable start to a sane policy. What I am concerned about is the entire way this case has been handled. It appears the mother is more interested in pushing an agenda than in what is right for both Bobby and the Girl Scouts that will be affected by this whole mess.

It appears that Bobby dresses as a girl, and is allowed to engage in girlish behavior, but it is also clear that he, and his parents, are presenting him as a boy. While, of course, in such a case it would be prudent and proper that the troop leader and other adults be informed that the child is transsexual, I would expect that a child in such a circumstance would be effectively stealth. This is clearly not the case here. Stories have, for example, reported on Bobby being bullied at school.

If this child actually identifies as a girl, and actually wishes to be a girl, then why is he, and his family, not making an actual effort to allow him to live as such? Why is his situation so well known?

This is the transgender extremist's dirty little secret. It is really not about being who they claim to be. It is about being a male who is presenting as a female. It is about subverting gender, it is about transgressing societal norms, and it is about forcing themselves on others.

If one claims to be a woman, or a girl, then one should be that. And if one is a transgender, then one should simply accept that one is at odds with the majority of society, and accept that people are going to wish to set reasonable limitations. Bobby, and his family, do not have a right to disrupt a Girl Scout troop, just so he can play dress up. If he wants to be a Girl Scout, then he needs to be a girl first, not a boy playing so bizarre game of make believe.

Thursday, October 27, 2011

It has been a while since he has made a complete ass of himself, but Bil Browning is at it again. Browning, who runs the hilariously over the top gay blog site Bilerico decided to trash Ashley Love, a post-op transsexual woman who has had the audacity to be both highly successful, and to disagree with the transgender party line. Bil is quite disgusted with the simple fact that Ms. Love will not meekly accept the label of "transgender," which he arrogantly goes out of his way to impose on Ms. Love. She does not identify that way, but Browning doesn't care. Of course the fact that she is quite articulate and is someone who is able to get her voice heard clearly sends Browning into fits of rage. How dare she disagree with him!!!!

Ms. Love speaks the truth, and this is just something that Browning will not abide. She refutes the party line, and that angers the transgender extremists, including others, such as "Autumn" Sandeen, "Monica" Helms" and "Antonia D'orsay Dyssonance." In another words, she is hated by the worst of the transgender kooks. Sounds to me like she is doing a pretty good job. About the only major transgender kook who has not viciously attacked Ms. Love is "Monica" Roberts, who has expressed issues, but is unwilling to go after her like the others because, well, Ashley is African-American. So, she only gets a little hate from Roberts. The rest of the boys are not so kind. It would be interesting to see if Ms. Love agrees with Roberts' racist rants.

But the real fun in a Bilerico post is usually in the comments, and this one is no exception. They open with a woman taking on Browning for his nastiness. A couple of transgender kooks jump her case because, like Ms. Love, she doesn't parrot the party line, and then Mr. Dyssonance himself jumps her case and tries to slam her hard. Typical. He really puts the kook in transgender kook. When dealing with that one, you simply have to remember, he is not sane, so trying to make sense of his rhetoric will only give you a headache.

After the woman who started us off puts Dyssonance in his place, one of the kooks comes back after her, shocked that she actually supports Ms. Love (it is always funny watching someone who simply cannot comprehend that anyone would not swallow the transgender party line without question).

Then another wannabe chimes in that he just can't understand why some distinguish between transgender and transsexual. He can't even muster the courage to "transition" (i.e. I would assume he means he can't bring himself to actually start crossdressing full time). There is no so blind....

Now, things start to really get interesting... Another nutcase (ironic, isn't it?) suggests that Ms. Love might be mentally ill and is just trying to get attention. Now, hold that thought....we are going to come back to it quickly. Anyway, things go back and forth about whether this person was attacking Ms. Love for being transsexual, or for not adhering to the appropriate party line.

Okay, another person takes Browning to task of his nastiness and actually does a pretty good job of putting him in his place. This brings the wrath of "Monica" Helms, one of the most extreme of the extremists. Now, Helms lets us know that he does not like Ms. Love, but he also takes a swat at Browning, who has actually put him him his place for acting the fool. Helms is too nasty for even Browning.

Things continue in this manner for a bit, and someone speaks up for Ms. Love, pointing out that she speaks for transsexuals, who are being somewhat oppressed by the transgender extremists which angers Mr. Dyssonance, He is not going to tolerate anyone trying to slip the yoke of being labeled as a transgender. In another words, he is a classic gender fascist. A few comments later, he attacks someone for pointing out that Ms. Love is not transgender, and that calling her such is "misgendering" her. In this case, I would have to agree. Of course, Mr. Dyssonance is having none of that.

A few comments later, things take a surreal turn. Helms, who has one of the most overinflated egos among the transgender kooks, picks up on the idea that Ms. Love is trying to get attention, making a comment about how she "is trying to force herself into the spotlight." Now, given both Helms' behavior, and that of his brother-in-arms "Autumn" Sandeen, that is downright hilarious. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black...

And so it goes.... I am a little surprised that Browning had the good sense to stay out of the comments. It must have been hard for him to refrain from moderating all those people taking him to task for being such a jerk....

The transgender community was renting their clothes, and wearing sackcloth and ashes over the comments of Dr. Keith Ablow about Chaz Bono's appearance on Dancing With the Stars. Dr. Ablow suggested that seeing Bono on TV might cause "impressionable" children to question their own gender identity. While I think that is a bit overblown, he does make a few good points when he suggests that there should be an examination of the current trends in therapy for "transgender" people.

Dr. Ablow has also been roundly attacked for saying that Bono is "not a man." Now, of course that is a mortal sin according to the transgender extremists. After all, their approach to "sex" is that people can claim to be something, and they automatically are. But, is he a man? Well, not according to his own words. After being booted from DWTS Bono made the comment that he wanted to show America, "...a different kind of man." In this context, that means, quite simply, that he is not really a man. Being a man, like being a woman, is a very binary thing. You either are, or you are not. There are not degrees of being a man.

Now, I really doubt that kids are going to watch Bono and decide they too are transsexual. It might plant the idea that being transgender is a way to "rebel," which is another issue. But that is not really the point. One problem is that there are problems with celebrating what is, in reality, a serious medical issue.

I mean, if Chaz Bono were truly a transsexual and actually wanted to simply live his life as a man, then why would he make such a big deal out of shoving his issues into everyone's face. It drastically reduces the chance that he will be seen as a man, and instead insures that he will be seen as, well, "transgender." No, I realize that it might be difficult for someone who is a celebrity to transition quietly, but quite honestly, Chaz Bono was not that well know before his very public transition. He made a somewhat unsuccessful attempt at a musical career, but after becoming an LGBT activist, he became a bit more prominent.

I am sure that Dr. Ablow and I would find a lot to disagree on. But, we would at least have common ground for dialog. For the transgender crowd, there is no common ground. He has some valid issues, and they, well they simply don't. They are upset because he is actually speaking the truth, albeit in a rather forceful, and flawed manner. He clearly leans away from acceptance of the validity of transsexualism, but apparently he does not reject it completely. Ironically, some of the more extremist transgender activists do.

Sunday, October 16, 2011

The audacity of transgender activists never fails to amaze me. But the recent actions of "Megan" Stabler really takes the cake. Stabler, who is the current token "trannie" at the Human Rights Campaign married a woman in Texas by claiming to be a man, even though Stabler has had sex reassignment surgery. I normally, with certain specific exceptions, treat post-ops as their target sex, but I will respect Mr. Stabler's apparent wishes, and refer to him as a male.

The story was first broken by the San Diego LGBT Weekly under the completely bizarre headline:

This, of course, is typical TG double-talk. It always amuses me that while the TG extremists make a big deal about how "sex is between the legs, gender is between the ears," they also attempt to imply that gender "changes" with transition." Gender is immutable. You are born with a brain wired male, or one wired female. You can change your gender expression, and your sex, to match your gender, or to be contrary. Transgender people change their gender expression to the opposite of their inherent gender, and transsexuals move to conform to their true gender. Transgender generally wish to remain their birth sex, as this enhances their transgression of gender, but their are exceptions. Stabler appears to be one of those cases.

The fact that Stabler is with HRC goes a long way towards explaining this travesty. There is a common, but erroneous belief among transgender people that a hierarchy exists with post-ops at the pinnacle. Of course, this is based, in part, on the insistence that transsexuals must accept assimilation under the transgender umbrella. While some true transsexuals do identify as transgender, many, perhaps most, do not.

Stabler has made a choice, and it will be the policy of this blog to refer to him with male pronouns. He has legally identified as male, and that is how he will be referred to. I generally refer, with very rare exceptions to post-op MTF transsexuals as women. Stabler will be one of those exceptions.

I should also note that "Autumn" Sandeen is defending Stabler's outrageous behavior as something done in support of "marriage equality." Of course, ultimately, it is not. It harms both the cause of same-sex marriage, and that of true transsexuals. It makes a mockery of changes to birth certificates, and it provide ammunition to the Religious Right.

Friday, October 7, 2011

In his unique style of cluelessness, "Autumn" Sandeen seems to have "discovered" that transgender people have incurred the wrath of the Religious Right. It is not clear of Mr. Sandeen has just just discovered this, or if he was desperate for something to write about. I mean, "transgender" people have been, as he puts it, "...On The Religious Right’s/Social Conservative’s Radar" for some years. This is nothing new.

The primary reason for this is the insistence of those, like Mr. Sandeen, that "transgender" has to be linked to "Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual," even though it really has little in common, and is not a sexual orientation. But, given the Religious Right's obsession with homosexuality, that they have "noticed" transgender should come as no surprise.

Truth be told, for many years, the vast majority of the Religious Right tended to largely ignore the whole issue. Oh, if the question came up, they would certainly disapprove of cross dressing, but it was not something they paid much attention to outside of the association with "drag queens." And while it has nothing to actually do with transgender, transsexualism was, with some exceptions, largely ignored and even accepted, especially if people were educated about the medical nature of the condition. Even now, the Religious Right finds it easier to attack transsexualism by linking it to transgender and homosexuality.

And a very good question would be if Mr. Sandeen is really that upset by getting attention from the Religious Right. I suspect he is actually not upset at all. In fact, I think he craves the attention.

Sunday, October 2, 2011

There was a momentary possibility that Medicaid in the State of New York would cover sex reassignment surgery. That quickly disappeared. Now, there are a number of good reasons that such surgery should be covered. For one, it is medically necessary for transsexuals. Unfortunately, the surgery was mislabeled as "transgender" surgery, and the usual kooks and extremists came out of the wood work and started pushing for it.

The opens the door for conservatives to start in about how we should not be indulging these disturbed people, and how limited resources should not be wasted.

Now, the truth is, those pushing for such coverage would likely never take advantage of it. The overwhelming majority are life-time members of the "They Will Take My Penis When They Pry My Cold Dead Fingers From It" Club. Oh, they will whine about how they "would" have the surgery if only it was not so expensive, and how they wish it was covered, but let's be serious...they often have had numerous chances to have the surgery, and even when such people have it offered they rarely take advantage.

When San Francisco approved providing surgery for city workers, the number taking advantage was surprisingly low. The same thing was the result when the University of California made it part of their medical benefits. The truth is, transsexuals are actually very rare. Transgender people don't want to change their sex. That would spoil the fun.

But, they are quick to come out of the woodwork and scare authorities into declining to provide them with a benefit they demand, but will never use, thus denying it to those who really need it.

Tuesday, September 20, 2011

It was with some degree of amusement that I watched "Cristan" Williams' hissy fits about Dr. Keith Ablow's comments about Chaz Bono's appearance on "Dancing With the Stars." Now, let me start by saying I don't particularly agree with Ablow. I did find it interesting that he seems to concede that he might well fail in his attempts to "cure" Chaz, and that if it came to it, he would support Chaz in seeking surgery.

That, of course, is a rather extreme version of how therapists should approach the treatment of transsexuals. They certainly should not rubber stamp requests for SRS. When they do, you end up with a very serious possibility of someone making a tragic error. I have seen it happen. SRS is not something to be rushed into,

But there is a bigger issue here. Mr. Williams is infuriated that Dr. Ablow would dare disagree with transgender dogma. The result has been an almost comedic attempt to destroy Ablow's career. Now, as I said, I don't particularly agree with Ablow, and even less so with Paul McHugh, who Ablow has apparently quoted in support of his positions.

Ablow has expressed some opinions I find a bit amusing, like suggesting that parents should not allow their children to watch "Dancing With the Stars" because it might cause them to decide they are "transgender." And he has made some nasty comments where he conflates transsexualism with transgender (that is probably what I would find most disturbing), but to suggest, as Mr. Williams does, that Ablow has violated medical ethics is, well, laughable.

Ablow is entitled to his views. He is not the only doctor to disagree with surgical treatment for transsexuals. So what? Does Mr. Williams really imagine that someone might mistakenly choose Ablow as their therapist in pursuit of surgery? Ironically, if that person was a true transsexual, Ablow has indicated that he would ultimately support them in pursuing SRS. That is better than many therapists, who firmly oppose anyone ever having surgery.

The problem here is simple. Some, especially those who made a poor choice, are so insecure that even the most minor of challenge to "transgender dogma" sends them into fits. Ablow is one opinion among many. Those inclined to think transsexuals in error will continue to do so. Those who understand the needs of true transsexuals will not be persuaded by his rants. And those like Mr. Williams, who feel the need to demand ideological purity with continue to have hissy fits about any disagreement. And they will continue to engage in behavior that will make themselves look foolish, like filing silly ethics complaints in desperate attempts to be noticed and feel important.

Tuesday, September 13, 2011

"Autumn" Sandeen is complaining that we don't have an acceptable word that covers everyone that he wants to be covered by transgender. Apparently, he is now throwing in the towel on forcing everyone under the transgender umbrella and is hoping to coin a new term.

Unfortunately, Mr. Sandeen misses the bigger picture. We do not need such a term. There is nothing that connects these diverse groups. Crossdressers are not the same as drag queens, who have nothing common with transsexuals, who are completely unrelated to gender queers....etc. The only ones who really want such a term are those like Mr. Sandeen who have some bizarre need to identify as something they clearly are not.

Mr. Sandeen has a desperate need to identify as a transsexual even though he clearly has no desire to actually change his sex, seeking instead to perpetuate a bizarre fantasy of being a woman with a penis...well, more specifically, "a legal female with a penis." This is absurd. But it is Mr. Sandeen's goal.

No, we don't need a new term. The old one has proven to be a failure. Mr. Sandeen should take a lesson from that, but I don't see that happening.

Friday, September 9, 2011

Well, "Autumn" Sandeen, the freshly minted male eunuch is again bragging about how he is defrauding everyone he can in a post entitled F Is For Female:Part One Of Many. Now, an interesting thought occurs to me. If, perhaps even when, Mr. Sandeen gets caught in his little lies, and someone decides to prosecute him for fraud (a lot of what he is doing requires basically swearing that something is true until penalty of perjury) does he realize that no amount of lying about the nature of his surgery is going to cause him to be placed anywhere except in a men's jail or prison. Likewise, if he gets arrested in another protest, like the one he loves to brag about, he will not be viewed as a female, no matter what his birth certificate claims. They will take one look at his penis, and pop him over to the male side. I can almost see him being dragged into a male cell, all the while crying out that he is really a female, while waving his birth certificate for all to see.

No, in Mr. Sandeen's case, 'F' is for fraud, fake, fibber, but most definitely not female.

Friday, September 2, 2011

"Autumn" Sandeen posted again about his castration. At least he seems to have stopped referring to his becoming a male eunuch as being "genital reconstruction surgery." He is now calling it "gender affirmation surgery," which is, in his case, an accurate term. The problem is, the gender he is affirmed as having by this surgery, is, contrary to his delusional/dishonest claim, male. Simply put, he has proven he is a man,

He made it clear in his past article that he was unwilling to part with his penis. At that point, he was claiming he was going to have "genital reconstruction surgery," but after numerous people pointed out that nothing was being reconstructed, he seems to have abandoned that false claim. Now, it is true that some transsexuals have an orchidectomy in advance of full SRS. They do this to reduce the amount of hormones they take. Mr. Sandeen has made it clear that this is the only surgery he plans to have.

Worse, he has made it clear that the reason he had this surgery is so he can perpetuate a fraud against the State of California in an attempt to change his birth certificate. Hopefully, someone will raise objections to this, and he will be blocked, and perhaps even prosecuted for perjury. For those who are interested the calendar for the San Diego court which will likely be hearing this case can be found here. Providing copies of Mr. Sandeen's blog posts to the court should prove interesting.

In his latest, and according to him, last post on the subject he makes the statement:

Quite a number of transsexual women believe vaginoplasties are a requirement to fully transition from man to woman. I believe instead that I was female before my orchiectomy, female afterwards, and female still should I ever have a vaginoplasty. Genital surgery is used by many transsexuals to affirm gender, but it doesn’t create male or female gender in the first place.

No, all transsexual women believe vaginoplasties are a requirement to fully transition from man to woman. Women do not have penises. That is common sense for the vast majority of the human race. But not for the delusional extremists of the transgender movement. And no, it is clear that Mr. Sandeen has never been female in any sense, and will never be female since one cannot change one's gender by changing one's mind.

Mr. Sandeen served successfully, as a male, in the Navy for twenty years. No transsexual would be able to accomplish this. It is bad enough when someone has had a long, successful career as a male, with no significant problems, and then claims to be a transsexual. It is completely laughable when that career was in the military. Yes, women serve in the military, but they serve in a different environment than men. The culture is significantly different.

So, I, and I am sure many others, have to disagree when Mr. Sandeen says:

So when y’all refer to me, the correct pronoun is she — I didn’t have that gender affirmation surgery for nothing, y’know?

No, the correct pronoun remains "he." And hopefully, his fraud will be exposed in court, it will be shown that he has affirmed his gender as male.

Wednesday, August 31, 2011

The transgender blogosphere is all abuzz about the submission that Cathy Brennan and Elizabeth Hungerford made to the United Nations Entity· for Gender Equality and Empowerment of Women's call for communications. Based on the reactions, you would think that Brennan and Hungerford called for "transgender people" to be outlawed, and for them to be rounded up and sent to reeducation centers where they would be forced to adhere to their birth gender. Instead, they have raised some very legitimate issues about the more extremists views that have become the norm for the "transgender community."

A lot of the noise has centered around three quotes from the document which runs to six rather dense pages:

The bill violates the privacy rights of every Maryland citizen.

Behavior that would normally be considered criminal will now be protected as a civil right.

The definition of “gender identity” trivializes the significance of biological sex.

The cry has gone up from the transgender extremists, "Horrors! To the ramparts! We are under attack, and our very existence is in danger!" At EHIPASSIKO, "Christan" Williams' rather silly blog, Williams refers to the letter as "exterminationist." Of course, this is more than a bit silly, but one would expect nothing less from Mr. Williams, who tends to be a bit hysterical (in more than one sense of the word). Well, in a sense, I guess they are right...they have demanded such ridiculous and radical changes that anything else probably seems unacceptable to them. But they face one little problem....the above is true. All three things are quite true.

In fact, these very things are at the core of the demands of the transgender extremists. They assert that:

Their rights to express their "gender identity" trump all other rights.

That their rights trump even the rights of women to be safe.

That biological sex doesn't, that one becomes fully female simply by making the claim that one is female.

While I generally do not care for some to the sillier policies of the radical fringe of feminism, in this case they are raising good points, while showing consideration for those who actually have legitimate needs.

For example, in discussing one state's laws they make the following assertion (emphasis mine):

This definition of "gender identity" does not require any objective proof. Rather, It merely requires the person. seeking protection to assert that he or she identifies as the sex opposite his or her sex at birth.Further, because.Title 11 only permits discrimination in sex-segregated facilities based on sex) a person asserting gender rdentiry as a basis to avoid "discrimination" must be permitted to use the rest room or bath house of their chosen "gender identity') ...... without regard to any action taken on the part of that individual to change their physiology to "become female" (Le., sex reassignment surgery.)

Clearly, they are not attacking true transsexuals, but instead the rising tide of men who think that putting on a dress makes them women. Since these "wannabe" women generally act, and quite often look, like men, it is understandable why women would be upset at the idea of them being able to force their way into women's room. Add in the fact that they make it clear that they have no desire to give up their penises, and it is clear that this is an invasion of privacy,

Therein lies the irony here, We are talking about men, claiming to be women, who have no concept of why women might not wish them in women's space. The very nature of their demands, and their attitudes are perhaps one of the strongest arguments against them. They show, by their behavior and attitudes, that they are not women, and have no concept of how women think.

Now, let's take a small step back, and consider exactly what is at stake here. As I pointed out, to hear the rhetoric from the transgender extremists, the radical feminists are demanding their extermination (Mr. Williams has said as much, actually) but in truth, this is about a simple issue, that we all know so well...men in women's space. The transgender extremists demand it, even to the point, in some cases, where nudity will be inevitable, and women oppose it.

And unlike some extremists, these radical feminists are not even demanding a total ban. They are simply asking for the reasonable standard that access be granted on the basis of proof of medical transition. That is, the weekend warriors, the cross dressers, the transvestites, and such would not be allowed access to women's spaces just on the basis of a claim of being a woman. And even there, what they are asking for is not panty checks. The bottom line, what they are asking for that has the transgender extremists going so far as to take of "extermination" (I am really having a good laugh at Mr. Williams' complete idiocy over this...) is that they simply want this standard imposed when there is litigation.

In another words, if someone is not demonstrably in transition, under medical supervision, and they sue for the right to access to use the women's room at work, they would not have a case.

Wow! Can you believe that such a simple, and reasonable request has led to claims of proposed genocide? There you have it. This is the transgender movement in a nutshell, which is where I suppose these nuts belong. They are so obsessed with access to women's restrooms that even the most reasonable of restraints, imposed to prevent a very real threat, is deemed outrageous.

And they wonder why those of us who really are women, those of us who knew early on, who struggled through life as women forced to live as men, who finally understand, who finally take the steps to put our lives right, simply don't want to be a part of their movement, oppose their silliness, and want to distance ourselves as far from their insanity as possible. It is not that we are elitist. It is simply that we are sane.

About Me

Copyright Notice

All original content of this blog is copyright 2017 by J.U. and all rights are reserved.

Comment Policy

Just so there is no confusion, and to make sure that certain gender fascists cannot make false claims, I want to make clear my policy concerning comments. The only rule, and it is a hard and fast one, is "NO INVASIONS OF PRIVACY!" That is, if you post information about me, such as my name, or other private information, your post will not see the light of day. After having a couple of rather nasty trolls try to get around this, I have had to do something I really dislike. Because Blogger does not allow me to block individuals, I now have to approve all comments. But, if your comment does not violate the one rule, it will be approved. So please, don't go running to someone and claim you were censored...especially someone with an established history of censoring posts to prevent actually having to defend his silliness...